Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-18-2013, 01:47 PM   #31
Veteran Member
NitroDC's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 342
QuoteOriginally posted by snake Quote
The OP didn't write this thread about the DA35.

I also don't know what "isn't not" is.
He didn't write it about the FA35 either.

02-18-2013, 01:50 PM   #32
Banned




Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NY/Germany
Posts: 1,183
QuoteOriginally posted by NitroDC Quote
He didn't write it about the FA35 either.
Then you should equally point that out to the one who criticized the FA35 talk, but then proceeded to do the DA35 talk.
02-18-2013, 01:50 PM   #33
Banned




Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NY/Germany
Posts: 1,183
QuoteOriginally posted by Allison Quote
I corrected the typo, sorry it happens when I am on an iPad.

I only threw in my experience with the da35 as a reply to you, that part wasn't for the OP. I get that you are happy with your FA35 and that is great.
I get that you're happy with your DA35 and I'm happy you're happy with it.
02-18-2013, 01:56 PM   #34
Site Supporter
mikeSF's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: East Bay Area, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,705
The write up in dpr mentions the bokeh of the sigma being somewhat weak. The examples given also look bad. I would guess if you are buying for bokeh, it may not be the right tool, but otherwise looks good on paper.

02-18-2013, 02:14 PM   #35
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,735
QuoteOriginally posted by Zav Quote
I would be interested to see a fair and honest comparison (without price consideration) to know if the 35 is a better piece of equipment.
Lens choice, above a certain threshold level, is a very personal thing,
so it might be impossible, or at least unhelpful,
to say that one lens is just "better" than another.
02-18-2013, 02:19 PM   #36
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,735
QuoteOriginally posted by mikeSF Quote
The write up in dpr mentions the bokeh of the sigma being somewhat weak. The examples given also look bad. I would guess if you are buying for bokeh, it may not be the right tool, but otherwise looks good on paper.
And yet the Photozone test says:
"The bokeh quality is not as dreamy as on fast portrait lenses, but quite smooth for a wide angle lens."

Bokeh is probably one of the most personal, subjective factors influencing a person's assessment of a lens.
02-18-2013, 02:31 PM   #37
Banned




Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NY/Germany
Posts: 1,183
DigitalRev's review of the Sigma 35, compared to the Canon and Nikon equivalents, rates the bokeh good. In fact, they did a blind test wtih their viewers and a large number put the Sigma in 1st place for overall rendition.
02-18-2013, 02:36 PM   #38
Zav
Pentaxian
Zav's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,339
QuoteOriginally posted by lytrytyr Quote
Lens choice, above a certain threshold level, is a very personal thing,
so it might be impossible, or at least unhelpful,
to say that one lens is just "better" than another.
Let's be honest, the FA31 is not flawless, aberrations for example are quite obvious. I am still interested by the comparison.

02-18-2013, 03:31 PM   #39
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 667
QuoteOriginally posted by Zav Quote
Let's be honest, the FA31 is not flawless, aberrations for example are quite obvious. I am still interested by the comparison.
The aberrations are an issue on the 31 and it does not use the most current coatings since this was a design originally made for film. There has been talk that if Pentax does bring out FF that they would need to update the 31 with better coatings for the digital era. Still, LR4 has made chromatic aberrations less of a problem. In less than 10 seconds the image can be nice and clean. But if you are looking for a SOOC experience, then the Sigma might pull some points - I would guess it would depend on what you planned on shooting most.
02-18-2013, 03:47 PM   #40
Zav
Pentaxian
Zav's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,339
QuoteOriginally posted by Allison Quote
The aberrations are an issue on the 31 and it does not use the most current coatings since this was a design originally made for film. There has been talk that if Pentax does bring out FF that they would need to update the 31 with better coatings for the digital era. Still, LR4 has made chromatic aberrations less of a problem. In less than 10 seconds the image can be nice and clean. But if you are looking for a SOOC experience, then the Sigma might pull some points - I would guess it would depend on what you planned on shooting most.
Just to clarify, I have been using a FA31 since 2008 on film and digital, so I woud tend to say that I know the lens a bit and I am using LR4 as well. I just want to know what is the best piece of equipement.
02-18-2013, 04:07 PM   #41
Site Supporter
mikeSF's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: East Bay Area, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,705
QuoteOriginally posted by lytrytyr Quote

Bokeh is probably one of the most personal, subjective factors influencing a person's assessment of a lens.
Thank you. Too many people make decisions based on center sharpness or whatnot when bokeh is often what gives a lens like this its character. Fortunately the FA31 has both, great bokeh as well as being a wonderful stopped down lens for landscape.
Incidentally, I am in the camp for owning both lenses, lol.
02-18-2013, 04:14 PM   #42
Veteran Member
JonPB's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 430
QuoteOriginally posted by Allison Quote
The aberrations are an issue on the 31 and it does not use the most current coatings since this was a design originally made for film. There has been talk that if Pentax does bring out FF that they would need to update the 31 with better coatings for the digital era. Still, LR4 has made chromatic aberrations less of a problem. In less than 10 seconds the image can be nice and clean. But if you are looking for a SOOC experience, then the Sigma might pull some points - I would guess it would depend on what you planned on shooting most.
I don't know which aberrations are being referred to, but the green bokeh fringing is what keeps me away from many Pentax lenses--the 31 included. So, I say to myself, Allison thinks that this is a 10 second correction in Lightroom. I'll take the high road, since I haven't tried this since I acquired LR4, but it will be evident that the correction will remove important greens from the first image posted by Digitalis. I'll even post the result and feel quite smug. Ten seconds? Hah. It took more than that.

Wait. Curses. Yes, it took more than 10 seconds, but it did entirely get rid of the problem. Again, I say: curses. That was the only thing that kept me from wanting the 31, not to mention the 43 and 50/1.2. I might need to give up locally roasted coffee and beer of all kinds for a year. Curses.

I might need to look further into this.
02-18-2013, 04:47 PM   #43
Site Supporter
Cynog Ap Brychan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucester
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,092
I'd have to disagree with the statement that the FA 31 is not worth the money. That is a purely subjective view, as many people, myself included, believe it is worth the price. For a start, it's incredibly well put together. An equivalent Leica lens (if there is such a thing) would likely cost two-and-a-half times what the Pentax costs. Sure, it might be "better" in some way, but again the assessment would likely boil down to personal preference and subjective judgement. I know nothing about the Sigma lens, but I'm sure it is a fine piece of equipment, judging by the Sigma lenses I do own. However, the FA 31 is a tad wider, while the Sigma is a tad faster. You pays your money and you take your choice. It all boils down to whatever best suits your kind of photography.

Incidentally, I have only recently bought the FA Limited, and it's a jewel of a lens. So far, I have only had a chance to use it once in the field, but I'm pretty excited by its colour rendition and definition. If I could only take one photo with the lens which is half as good as the one by MikeSF, I'd consider the money to be very well spent!
02-18-2013, 05:11 PM   #44
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
I felt 35mm was a bit too tight on APS-C, 31 feels just right, as does 30mm.
02-18-2013, 05:17 PM   #45
Site Supporter
Cynog Ap Brychan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucester
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,092
QuoteOriginally posted by Zav Quote
No you didn't say so but I would be interested to see a fair and honest comparison (without price consideration) to know if the 35 is a better piece of equipment.
Hmmm this got me thinking. Can we ever really say that one lens (or one car, or one smartphone, for that matter) is better than another one? Let's consider two fictional lenses. Lens A is a little sharper than lens B, has a faster aperture and is better built. So, it may be easy to conclude that lens A is "better" than lens B. Case solved; end of.......

But wait. Maybe your style of photography involves long hikes, or scaling mountains, or some other energetic activity. Lens B is half the weight of lens A. That may be an important factor, that outweighs (sorry, no pun intended) the moderate loss of sharpness or speed. Or you may do a lot of travel photography, and lens B is much cheaper than lens A, so if it's lost or stolen it is much more easily replaced. The lenses may have a different colour rendition, and it becomes a subjective choice as to which is more pleasing, or suits your type of photography more closely - skin tones for portraiture; sky rendition for landscapes, etc. One may focus more closely than the other, and so on.

So, it is quite possible that the "inferior" lens B might be the "better" lens - for you. And that's the clincher: which lens best suits your need? It might be lens A, but if you can't afford it, that's another pretty decisive factor. It would be nice if we could personally test out lenses for a few days before making a decision, but this is rarely possible. So, all too often we rely on the assessment of "experts" who can, at best, only give a mixture of measurement and opinion. The only opinion that really matters is your own, and this will depend on a variety of factors and only you can decide which are really important. I have learned this to my cost, having spent much money on brilliant lenses that never leave the house because of their size and weight. A clear case of want overcoming actual need.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
31mm, fa, fa 31mm, k-mount, pentax lens, sigma, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FA 31mm or Zeiss 35mm f/2 ZK Distagon cmmurray Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 51 02-15-2011 11:22 AM
FA 31mm or DA 35mm gtl Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 11 11-20-2010 01:07 PM
The FA 31mm on the market is made in Japan or Vietnam? henryjing Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 29 03-20-2010 09:49 PM
FA 35mm/f2 now or DA 35mm in the future? Edvinas Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 01-10-2007 06:12 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:16 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top